Afghanistan Local Architecture Review

Afghanistan Local Architecture Review Key Findings on vernacular shelter designs, materials, and local building practices in Afghanistan November 2020 AFGHANISTAN LOCAL ARCHITECTURE REVIEW November 2020 Key Findings EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Shelter Construction After nearly 40 years of conflict and displacement, Afghanistan • Most interviewed homeowners preferred permanent brick remains one of the world’s most complex humanitarian crisis. or pakhsa (packed mud) flat roof shelters, mainly due to Shelter needs of displaced, host, and shock-affected populations the ease of construction and access to materials and skilled remain at the forefront of this crisis with over 6.6 million people labour needed to construct them. However, these shelters in need of Emergency Shelter and Non-food Item (ES/NFI) were reported to require materials that could only be found assistance, according to the Humanitarian Needs Overview for in markets and/or required special skills, suggesting that the 2021. Of these, 2.9 million are projected to be in need of emergency skills and materials needed for these shelter types may not shelter assistance, 2.2 million in need of transitional shelters, and always be readily available in all areas of the country. 5.8 million of shelter repairs or NFI assistance.1 • Most interviewed homeowners and FGD respondents Previous studies have highlighted how many emergency ES/NFI preferred shelters based on affordability and cost; needs are linked to an overall lack of resilience and heightened while stone and curved roof shelters were noted to be more vulnerability, where many poor families lack the resources to repair durable and provide better insulation than flat roof shelters, their homes following a major shock, often forcing homeowners into 2 the expense and skills required made other, cheaper and less debt that limit their ability to recover. The humanitarian community robust shelter types more desirable. has taken note of this link, highlighting in the Humanitarian Response Plan that transitional shelter responses can play a • Interviewed homeowners reported that tradition played a critical role in building homeowner resilience and keeping them very strong role in the choice of shelter and its associated both out of debt and of other, broader needs.3 materials. This helped to inform the finding that shelter designs and materials used had changed little from the However, despite the clear recognition for more transitional and shelter types identified in secondary sources, many of which permanent shelter responses, there is still a lack of understanding were published in the 1970s. The only major changes in of what types of responses would be most effective. Previous construction materials were a shift from woven reed mats studies have noted than many transitional or permanent shelter towards plastic sheeting, and the modest increased use of responses use materials that are not accessible or affordable in the metal for construction purposes. areas of response, or require skills or expertise not found within the beneficiaries' communities.4 • Among tent dwellers, the use of cotton tents tended to be more urban, and associated with displacement or poverty. While standard transitional and permanent shelter packages have 5 Black tents were more rural and often linked to nomadic been put together by a variety of organizations, these have not or semi-nomadic cultural practices, though some displaced always been designed with local shelter materials or regional homeowners used them as well. nuances in mind. In order to strengthen the ES/NFI Cluster's coordination of transitional and permanent shelter responses, Winterization and Comfort REACH conducted a detailed assessment of shelter types, building practices, and hazard mitigation measures across all 7 • Winter preparations were reported by most interviewed regions of Afghanistan. The assessment used a mixed-methods homeowners to have negative environmental and approach, combining structured individual interviews (IIs) and sociological effects. Gathering of wood and brush for fires semi-structured focus group discussions (FGDs) with homeowners cut down Afghanistan's few forests at an unsustainable rate, on their shelter types and local building practices, respectively, and and children are often needed to search for plastic and other detailed key informant interviews (KIIs) with local shelter experts, harmful materials to burn. that catalogued shelter designs and bills of quantity (BoQs). All • Most interviewed homeowners were aware of the negative respondents were non-displaced and internally displaced person effects these practices had, but due to a lack of money felt (IDP) homeowners, selected on the basis of their shelter types. The they had no other options in order to prepare for winter. assessment, conducted between 1-30 November 2020, covered 26 different shelter type variations in 21 districts spread across 16 • Cheaper masonry materials, such as pakhsa, sun-dried provinces. In total, 585 IIs, 64 FGDs, and 63 KIIs were conducted. bricks, were reported by FGD participants to be better at providing insulation in the winter and keeping the shelter All findings are indicative, rather than representative. The final cool in the summer than more expensive fired bricks. The results paint a contextualized picture of local shelter types and use of kaghil, a mud plaster, was also reported to improve their associated construction and repair methods, as well as insulation in shelters, regardless of the construction materials climatic mitigation measures across Afghanistan. The following key used. findings are of note: 1. UNOCHA, 2021, Humanitarian Needs Overview, November 2020. 4. Samuel Hall, Evaluation of UNHCR Shelter Assistance Programme, 2012. 2. REACH, Afghanistan: ES-NFI Assessment, 2019. 5. UNHCR, Shelter and Settlement Section, Shelter Design Catalogue, January 3. UNOCHA, Humanitarian Response Plan: Afghanistan, 2019 - 2021, December 2016. 2020. 2 AFGHANISTAN LOCAL ARCHITECTURE REVIEW November 2020 Repair and Maintenance Materials Used • In addition to shelters themselves; most homeowners did not • Interviewed homeowners noted that materials used came have the resources to repair their own shelters, suggesting from a variety of different sources; most wood, fabric, reeds, that the loss of a permanent shelter was a major factor for rope, and other materials were purchased in markets, while homeowner vulnerability. masonry was found in nature. The use of particular types of each material varied considerably by region. • Interviewed homeowners reported that most households, even those living in permanent shelters, to be highly vulnerable to • Most homeowners reported using sub-standard materials for major shocks, primarily due to a lack of financial resources to repair and winterization. This was primarily due to a lack pay for shelter construction, repairs and winterization. of money; homeowners reported that they would buy better materials if they could afford it. • Interviewed homeowners noted similar constraints to shelter repairs as for constructing shelters; adequate materials were • Many homeowners reported that some of the materials that often unavailable or very expensive, and many homeowners they used to build their shelters were inherited; many did discussed having to choose between shelter repair and buying not have the money or resources to procure new materials enough food to eat. Many homeowners described being one for new shelters or repairs. When a shelter or its materials major shock away from being trapped in a cycle of poverty. were lost or damaged, homeowners reported that it was often difficult to replace these items, diminishing their Hazard Resistance resilience and increasing overall vulnerability. • Hazard resistance was a large influence on shelter design Regional Variations and materials, and most interviewed homeowners connected stronger shelters with stronger protection from both • According to interviewed homeowners, most differences natural hazards and other human beings. The preference in building practices and overall shelter needs tended to for permanent shelters over temporary shelters like tents or vary based on the shelter type, rather than specific regional huts was often connected to safety. differences. However, specific shelter type variations tended to be more prevalent depending on the surrounding environment, • Curved roof structures were associated with hazard resistance suggesting that location plays an indirect role in shelter needs. by FGD participants, and their thick walls and domed roofs Specifically: were noted to provide greater comfort in summer and insulation in winter. In addition, these structures were also reported to be • Curved roof shelters were more prevalent in the North and West due to far more resistant to earthquakes, flooding, and other natural an historic lack of access to sufficient lumber. hazards. However, they were less preferred due to the skills • Flat roof shelters were more common in the East and South East due to and expenses needed to build them. better access to lumber. • Black tents were more common in the South and South East where • Participants in FGDs clearly linked their shelter concerns to temperatures were warmer; in northern regions, they were only used other sectors, primarily protection; poor shelter conditions during the summer. were associated with protection concerns. This was due • Stone shelter variations were more common in mountainous areas like to both a lack of security

Load more